SC awards ₹1 lakh compensation to airman for unfair treatment in overtaking episode
SS Pandey, a radar fitter enrolled in the IAF since 1997 stopped at a railway crossing in a civil area, Pandey overtook a line of waiting vehicles, including that of squadron leader
In an unusual case that began with the overtaking of a senior officer’s vehicle at a railway crossing, the Supreme Court has awarded ₹1 lakh in compensation to an Indian Air Force airman for the “unjustified and uncalled for” punishment and the ensuing litigation he endured.
What started as a minor breach of military decorum spiralled into a decade-long legal battle which, a bench of justices PS Narasimha and Sandeep Mehta underlined, raised questions about the balance between discipline and fairness within defense services.
The fateful incident occurred on May 17, 2010, when SS Pandey, a radar fitter enrolled in the Indian Air Force since 1997, was heading home after his shift. Stopped at a railway crossing in a civil area, Pandey overtook a line of waiting vehicles, including that of squadron leader and parked his motorcycle right at the railway gate.
This minor action drew the ire of the squadron leader, who, in a display of rank and authority, approached Pandey, confiscated his motorcycle keys, and ordered him to report to the guard room. The officer claimed that Pandey’s action violated Air Force discipline. The situation escalated quickly when Pandey, allegedly frustrated, used language that was interpreted as insubordinate.
The squadron leader was not about to let this slide. He filed charges against Pandey, accusing him of violating Air Force discipline and using insubordinate language. This led to Pandey being put under “closed arrest,” and his motorcycle was impounded.
What followed was a series of disciplinary actions that eventually resulted in Pandey being punished with an official admonition in January 2011. Despite his attempts to appeal the punishment, his requests were denied, leading him to escalate the matter to the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT).
The AFT ultimately ruled in Pandey’s favor in 2017, setting aside the punishment of admonition and criticizing the squadron leader’s conduct. It observed that the officer had taken the incident “personally” and acted in a manner that was “vindictive,” suggesting that the situation could have been resolved with far less fuss.
However, the tribunal denied Pandey’s request for compensation, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court.
In its judgment delivered on October 21, the top court not only upheld the tribunal’s findings but went a step further by awarding Pandey ₹1 lakh in compensation. The bench acknowledged that while overtaking a senior officer’s vehicle might technically be considered an act of indiscipline, the punishment far outweighed the offence.
“A small incident has unnecessarily grown beyond proportion,” the bench of justices Narasimha and Mehta stated. It also noted that “small excesses like overtaking the vehicle of one’s senior at a railway crossing may be an incident of indiscipline in defense services, but the balance and proportion that needs to be maintained between such an infraction and its punishment will always be at the core of good governance.”
The court further criticised the Indian Air Force’s handling of the situation, pointing out that rather than protecting Pandey from such heavy-handed actions, the institution threw its weight behind the senior officer.
“The disproportionate measure adopted by the respondents,” the judgment noted, led to Pandey’s “great amount of distress.” The bench underscored that this was a case where an apology or a simple reprimand could have sufficed, but instead, a “lone battle” ensued, one that tarnished Pandey’s otherwise unblemished 14-year service record.
Also Read: SC orders states and UTs to upload remission policies, give reasons for rejection
“When the institutions that we build grow beyond proportion, officers act mechanically and many times helplessly, ignore the simple and readily available remedies that are available in our normal lives. We would have thought that an incident like this would have ended if a senior officer had intervened at the right time and resolved the issue by taking into account the emotional aspect of the dispute,” it added.
In its decision to grant compensation, the Supreme Court emphasised the importance of maintaining a sense of proportion in matters of discipline within defense services. “If the balance is not maintained,” the Court warned, “the distinction between bad governance, impropriety, unfairness, and inhuman treatment is not much.”
While acknowledging the limits of monetary compensation for the indignity and harassment Pandey suffered, the Court concluded that ₹1 lakh would serve as “a token of our concern and in recognition of a citizen’s identity and dignity.”